The case started after Kamra allegedly called Eknath Shinde a “gaddar” during a stand-up performance. This comment referred to Shinde’s rebellion in 2022 against Shiv Sena leader Uddhav Thackeray.
Bombay: On Monday (7th April), the Bombay High Court agreed to hear a petition filed by stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra seeking to cancel the First Information Report (FIR) registered against him.
The case is related to Kamra’s use of the word “gaddar” (traitor) in one of his comedy shows — a comment allegedly aimed at Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.
A Division Bench of Justice Sarang Kotwal and Justice SM Modak agreed to hear Kamra’s petition on Tuesday, April 8, after his lawyer, Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai, urgently mentioned the matter.
The petition was originally scheduled for a hearing on April 21, but Seervai requested an earlier date because of threats to Kamra’s life.
“It is a matter of extreme urgency and some concern… really going through the fundamental rights and not so much criminal law,” Seervai submitted before the bench.
Seervai informed the court that the Madras High Court had already granted Kamra interim protection from any police action. However, that protection was only valid until April 7 (Monday).
“There are death threats being given to the petitioner. The Madras High Court has taken cognisance of the threats and immediately granted interim protection till today,” Seervai told the judges.
He also mentioned that the Mumbai Police had already reached Pondicherry, where Kamra is currently staying.
“We have filed the petition on Saturday. The situation is very grave. There are reports that the police has already reached Pondicherry (where Kamra is currently staying),” he added.
At this point, Justice Kotwal suggested that Kamra could also consider filing for anticipatory bail before the jurisdictional court, citing a recent Supreme Court judgment in the Priya Indoria case.
ALSO READ: Traitor Joke On Eknath Shinde: Kunal Kamra Gets 2nd Legal Notice From Mumbai Police
“We will consider this petition independently, but you also consider the other route,” Justice Kotwal advised.
While Seervai agreed to explore that legal route, he strongly urged the court to hear the quashing petition urgently due to the ongoing threats.
Although the bench did not agree to hear the case later that same day, it accepted the request to list it for a hearing the very next day, Tuesday.
Background
The case started after Kamra allegedly called Eknath Shinde a “gaddar” during a stand-up performance. This comment referred to Shinde’s rebellion in 2022 against Shiv Sena leader Uddhav Thackeray.
Shinde’s move led to a split in the Shiv Sena, and he later formed a government in Maharashtra in alliance with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). This major political change has remained a controversial subject in the State.
A Shiv Sena MLA named Muraji Patel filed a complaint against Kamra. As a result, an FIR was registered in Mumbai under the following sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS):
- Section 353(1)(b) – Public mischief
- Section 353(2) – Public mischief (continued)
- Section 356(2) – Defamation
Interestingly, even though the FIR was filed in Mumbai, Kamra currently lives in Villupuram, Tamil Nadu.
On March 28, the Madras High Court granted anticipatory bail to Kamra, which protected him from being arrested. However, that bail protection ended on April 7, creating the need for urgent hearing in the Bombay High Court.
Despite receiving three summons, Kamra has not appeared before the Mumbai Police for questioning.
However, Kunal Kamra has made it clear that he will not apologise. Late on Monday night, he posted a message saying,
“I don’t fear this mob and I will not be hiding under my bed, waiting for this to die down.”
He also wrote on social media platform X,
“I will not apologise. What I said is exactly what Mr Ajit Pawar (first DCM) said about Mr Eknath Shinde (second DCM). To the political elders threatening to teach me lesson, Our right to freedom of speech and expression is not only used routinely to fawn over the powerful and rich even though today’s media would have us believe otherwise. Your inability to take a joke at the expense of a powerful public figure does not change the nature of my right. As far as I know, it is not against the law to poke fun at our leaders and the circus that is our political system.”
He further added,
“However, I am willing to cooperate with the police and courts for any lawful action taken against me. But will the law be fairly and equally deployed against those who have decided that vandalism is the appropriate response to being offended by a joke? And against the unelected members of the BMC, who have arrived today at Habitat without prior notice and tore the place down with hammers? Perhaps for my next venue, I will opt for Elphinstone bridge, or any other structure in Mumbai that’s in need of speedy demolition.”
In another strong message, Kamra addressed the group who attacked the venue of his show. He said,
“To the mob that decided that Habitat should not stand. An entertainment venue is merely a platform. A space for all sorts of shows. Habitat (or any other venue) is not responsible for my comedy, nor does it have any power or control over what I say or do. Neither does any political party. Attacking a venue for a comedian’s words is senseless as overturning a lorry carrying tomatoes because you did not like the butter chicken you were served.”
This entire situation has now become a hot topic in Maharashtra politics. On one side, the ruling party and its supporters are demanding action against Kamra for insulting their leader. On the other hand, many people are standing with Kamra, saying that freedom of speech should be protected and comedy should not be treated like a crime.
ALSO READ: Kunal Kamra ‘Naya Bharat’ Row Explained: Can Police Legally Summon Show Attendees?
The Bombay High Court will now hear Kamra’s petition on April 8, where the court will decide whether or not to cancel the FIR filed against him. Meanwhile, Kamra may also consider applying for anticipatory bail in Mumbai, as suggested by the court.
